Attack surface management vs vulnerability management. Which one is right for you? Well, in truth, there’s no need to choose between attack surface management (ASM) and vulnerability management at all. The two approaches are complementary and both can form part of a part of a robust security program. The main difference is in terms of scope.
While vulnerability management takes a look at your known assets, focusing on the potential impact of any vulnerability found affecting your systems or networks, ASM adds context to any risks it may find. It evaluates your entire attack surface, consisting of both known and unknown assets.
Let’s take a closer look at the differences between ASM and vulnerability management. Traditionally, vulnerability management relies on either active or passive vulnerability scanners to monitor and test operating systems and software solutions for possible weaknesses.
In contrast, ASM is broader in its scope. It evaluates all the possible entry points into your IT network that a cyberattacker may take. ASM involves the identification, assessment, and minimization of any possible attack points, looking at more than just individual assets. It also looks at how these assets are connected within the context of your wider IT ecosystem.
As organizations have seen the number of digital solutions at their disposal increase, their attack surface has also grown. As such, ASM has become a vital component of defense strategies at many businesses. It is unsurprising, therefore, that the ASM market is predicted to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 31.3% between 2024 and 2030.
Rather than viewing them as contrasting approaches to cybersecurity, it makes more sense to focus on the complementary aspects that are shared by vulnerability management and ASM. Serving as a subset of ASM, vulnerability management is likely to involve regular, scheduled scans of your assets. ASM simply takes things things up a notch.
Why vulnerability management is no longer enough
It’s clear that the IT landscape at many companies is more complex and fragmented than ever. The majority (89%) of large companies globally have digital and AI transformation projects currently underway. Cloud computing has become similarly widespread, with most organizations that use the cloud employing multi-cloud solutions.
In this more complex digital environment, traditional approaches to vulnerability management are no longer sufficient. Shadow IT, the Internet of Things, ad-hoc software implementations, and increasingly convoluted software supply chains all mean that businesses have more openings for attackers to exploit.
The latest GigaOm Radar Report makes the similarities and differences between ASM and vulnerability management explicit. In the report’s executive summary, GigaOm’s Chris Ray speaks of the additional cybersecurity challenges created by rapid digital growth, which has resulted in attack surfaces expanding and shifting.
Leading the way
With all the discussion around attack surface management vs vulnerability management, not to mention the many other new security tools and practices on the market (from automated penetration testing to Threat Exposure Management ), it’s understandable if organizations are left a little puzzled by what their next cybersecurity step should be. The GigaOm report looks to bring a little extra clarity here.
Outlining the criteria used by industry experts to evaluate and rank ASM solutions, the GigaOm report helps businesses make better-informed decisions regarding their cybersecurity strategy. The report compares solutions using various criteria, including flexibility, discovery frequency, scalability, cost, and ease of use.
Looking at various target markets and deployment models, GigaOm recognizes Hadrian as the only vendor that could be classified as both a leader and an outperformer in the ASM market. These titles have been awarded in light of Hadrian’s first-rate asset discovery, which covers a wide array of internal assets, as well as third-party elements.
The GigaOm report also reserved particular praise for Hadrian’s Orchestrator AI, an automated security monitoring tool. This functionality powers Hadrian’s autonomous penetration testing capability, emulating real-world attacker behavior and providing high-fidelity testing without the need for manual intervention. It’s why Hadrian has become known for leveraging a hacker’s mindset in identifying and prioritizing threats.
The increasing importance of ASM doesn’t mean vulnerability management is completely without use. It is still important for security professionals looking to evaluate the risks faced by specific assets, especially software-based ones. Potentially damaging vulnerabilities, including cloud misconfigurations, out-of-date or unpatched applications, missing user credentials, or unencrypted information can all be identified, but risk assessment is necessarily limited because vulnerability management may miss how different assets connect with one another.
With Hadrian, businesses don’t need to be concerned that a failure to recognize the context surrounding assets and their risks will allow cyberattackers to find a route in. The fundamental principles that underpin vulnerability management tools are aligned with the more holistic approaches you see from ASM strategies.
Attackers won’t stop thinking of new ways to infiltrate assets and networks. That’s why cybersecurity must show a similar willingness to evolve. At Hadrian, we do. Our attack surface management strategy is both holistic and continuous, stretching beyond vulnerability management to map your assets and their dependencies. We remain committed to pushing the boundaries of cybersecurity technology with an approach to ASM that is proactive, automated, and constantly evolving.
Learn more about the latest developments in the attack surface management space and the vendors leading the way in the industry by downloading the GigaOm Radar Report 2024 for Attack Surface Management here.
